[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2016-August-12, 05:09, said:

At the fear of taking it further, the optimal solution is arguably a central supporting column with three legs set under a false table floor, thus providing both the stability on uneven floors of a tripod with maximal leg room, while also keeping the base as wide as possible. Sadly this design is fairly rare.

Probably because such a table cannot be folded.

[pran]

Zelandakh, on 2016-August-11, 03:11, said:

Is it still insignificant if it turns out that the extra card came from an opponent's hand on the previous board?

Sure.
The important fact is that the player failed to count his cards and ascertain that he has exactly thirteen cards before looking at them.

Where that extra card came from and how it entered his hand is insignificant (except for identifying if possible a separate violation of law by some other player).

[pran]

pran, on 2016-August-10, 08:03, said:

He may however not accept any favourable result caused by the irregularity.

FrancesHinden, on 2016-August-14, 04:59, said:

"He may however not accept any favourable result caused by the irregularity"

Why not? Please specify the relevant law.

What about Law 79A2.
Although it does not specifically includes "tricks won illegally" I consider knowingly accepting such results as cheating.

Maybe other directors think this is quite OK, I disagree.

[lamford]

pran, on 2016-August-14, 10:10, said:

What about Law 79A2.
Although it does not specifically includes "tricks won illegally" I consider knowingly accepting such results as cheating.

Maybe other directors think this is quite OK, I disagree.

The trick in question was won by the ace of hearts from another deck. 44F states:

F. Tricks Not Containing Trumps
A trick that does not contain a trump is won by the player who has contributed to it the highest card of the suit led.

Note that it does not say "the highest card from the same deck". So the trick was not won illegally. There is no obligation on the defender to point it out, even if he is aware of what has happened.

And the player did count his cards before looking at them, as you would gather if you read the OP or the thread. He gained a card at some point during the play.

[jnichols]

lamford, on 2016-August-14, 16:33, said:

The trick in question was won by the ace of hearts from another deck. 44F states:

F. Tricks Not Containing Trumps
A trick that does not contain a trump is won by the player who has contributed to it the highest card of the suit led.

Note that it does not say "the highest card from the same deck". So the trick was not won illegally. There is no obligation on the defender to point it out, even if he is aware of what has happened.

And the player did count his cards before looking at them, as you would gather if you read the OP or the thread. He gained a card at some point during the play.

So, are you saying I can pull an ace from my sleeve and legally win a trick with it?

[lamford]

jnichols, on 2016-August-14, 16:52, said:

So, are you saying I can pull an ace from my sleeve and legally win a trick with it?

The laws cover this: 13F:
F. Surplus Card
Any surplus card not part of the deal is removed if found. The auction and play continue unaffected. If such a card is found to have been played to a quitted trick an adjusted score may be awarded.

Note the provision "if found". And 72B1 states:
1. A player must not infringe a law intentionally, even if there is a prescribed rectification he is willing to accept.

So, no, you cannot pull an ace from your sleeve, or if you do, you might get worse than an adjusted score against you. In this example, there was no suggestion that the rogue ace of hearts was introduced intentionally, and there is no obligation on the person with the correct ace of hearts to prevent a trick being won with it.

[barmar]

To summarize, if you find the surplus card before it's quitted, you remove it and continue. If you find it after it has been quitted, the score is adjusted (13F says "may be", I assume that's to allow for the case where the TD determines that the extra card had no effect on the result, perhaps it was just a deuce).

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2016-August-14, 08:25, said:

Probably because such a table cannot be folded.

YOu could certainly construct the table top to fold down on either side of the central pillar and I am fairly sure you could create a similar construction for the base although it would require a little engineering know-how. Even if not, the base could certainly be pivotted to create a flat form for storage. If such a table is not currently on the market, perhaps this is an opportunity for an entrepreneur!

[axman]

lamford, on 2016-August-14, 16:33, said:

The trick in question was won by the ace of hearts from another deck. 44F states:

F. Tricks Not Containing Trumps
A trick that does not contain a trump is won by the player who has contributed to it the highest card of the suit led.

Note that it does not say "the highest card from the same deck". So the trick was not won illegally. There is no obligation on the defender to point it out, even if he is aware of what has happened.

And the player did count his cards before looking at them, as you would gather if you read the OP or the thread. He gained a card at some point during the play.

Note that counting one's cards need not mean that the count was accurate. I might even suggest that it would be a dubious idea for such player to insist his count was accurate and 13: just consider the implications of explaining how the 14th card (from a different deck) got there.

Supposedly, L67 has something to say about that crazy extraaneous HA and the ownership of such tricks that may contain it, at least until the cards are mixed.

[pran]

On counting one's cards before looking at them:
I remember once, very long time ago (probably some 30 years), I faced my cards as Dummy with a remark that I did have just the 14 HCP I had promised during the auction. The other three players all studied my cards with interest, neither of them noticing that I in fact had only 12 cards and a total of (only) 12 HCP.

To this day I have never understood what really had happened because not only was I one card short, but when searching for the missing one we found the ♦Q still happily residing in it's board pocket! (Bringing my HCP total up to the claimed 14)

And trust me, I had not looked at my cards in advance! (Also, we have an absolute ban on any kind of alcohol consumption during events in Norway so we all were sober.)

[gordontd]

pran, on 2016-August-17, 14:48, said:

On counting one's cards before looking at them:
I remember once, very long time ago (probably some 30 years), I faced my cards as Dummy with a remark that I did have just the 14 HCP I had promised during the auction. The other three players all studied my cards with interest, neither of them noticing that I in fact had only 12 cards and a total of (only) 12 HCP.

To this day I have never understood what really had happened because not only was I one card short, but when searching for the missing one we found the ♦Q still happily residing in it's board pocket! (Bringing my HCP total up to the claimed 14)

And trust me, I had not looked at my cards in advance! (Also, we have an absolute ban on any kind of alcohol consumption during events in Norway so we all were sober.)

Clearly you had absent-mindedly put that card back in the board at some point after counting your points.

[Trinidad]

gordontd, on 2016-August-18, 00:52, said:

Clearly you had absent-mindedly put that card back in the board at some point after counting your points.

That can easily happen when you have a wobbly table and, instead of focusing on bridge, you start to think about a better table design...

Rik

[Zelandakh]

Trinidad, on 2016-August-18, 02:31, said:

That can easily happen when you have a wobbly table and, instead of focusing on bridge, you start to think about a better table design...

Or you have a SB to deal with and have to put the cards back temporarily.

[WellSpyder]

pran, on 2016-August-17, 14:48, said:

(Also, we have an absolute ban on any kind of alcohol consumption during events in Norway so we all were sober.)

No wonder we see lots of Norwegians playing in English events....

[pran]

gordontd, on 2016-August-18, 00:52, said:

Clearly you had absent-mindedly put that card back in the board at some point after counting your points.

Trinidad, on 2016-August-18, 02:31, said:

That can easily happen when you have a wobbly table and, instead of focusing on bridge, you start to think about a better table design...

Rik

Zelandakh, on 2016-August-18, 02:38, said:

Or you have a SB to deal with and have to put the cards back temporarily.

Nice suggestions, but (unfortunately) we were able to discard all of those at the time as definitely not being the case.

[Trinidad]

pran, on 2016-August-17, 14:48, said:

Also, we have an absolute ban on any kind of alcohol consumption during events in Norway so we all were sober.

Trinidad, on 2016-August-18, 02:31, said:

That can easily happen when you have a wobbly table and, instead of focusing on bridge, you start to think about a better table design...

Zelandakh, on 2016-August-18, 02:38, said:

Or you have a SB to deal with and have to put the cards back temporarily.

So, now we know what afterlife looks like for cheats... They have to play in Norway with wobbly tables and against SB's.

Rik

[lamford]

Trinidad, on 2016-August-19, 05:56, said:

So, now we know what afterlife looks like for cheats... They have to play in Norway with wobbly tables and against SB's.

Rik

And be permanent teetotallers ... Worse off than the cheat Claudius who, according to the dramatist Seneca, was forced to play dice in hell with bottomless cups ...